Living with Terrorism

“The times have changed, and France is going to have to live with terrorism.”

The words of France’s prime minister Manuel Valls are almost unbelievable. Almost. But in a way he is right. France is estimated to be somewhere between 7-9% Muslim as of 2015 according to the CIA World Factbook. In 2004, the Institut Montaigne estimated that 10% of the population in metropolitan France was North African and 3% black African, meaning it was likely over 10% Muslim then and certainly over 10% now. And based on testing of newborns for sickle-cell disease, a third of babies born in French hospitals were inferred to be of African origin in 2012, which again, could have only gone up since.

But as the multiplicity of sources implies, there is no good record-keeping available. The French government doesn’t officially collect religious or ethnographic statistics about its citizenry—because that would imply distinctions exist between “French” people and that is ideologically wrong—so this is an issue that the government either a.) doesn’t care about or b.) doesn’t want French people to know about. In any event, there is criminal negligence on the part of the French state in telling its citizenry that they will have to live with being killed every so often by preventable ethno-religious violence. The domestic presence of a large foreign population that originates from across a large body of water is entirely avoidable. But this is what the highest authority in the land believes, that France will have to live with terrorism because to not live with terrorism would involve doing something mean.

“Human rights are denied by fanatics, and France is clearly their target.”

President François Hollande could not offer a much better interpretation of the July 14 Muslim terror attack in Nice than Valls, but he certainly tried. The terrorists must hate human rights! Yes, that must be it—terrorists are mad at France because it is such an egalitarian and morally-correct place. It has nothing to do with primordial hatred between different identity groups, like Europeans and Muslims.

I mean sure, the first contact between Europeans and Islamized Arabs was the latter’s invasion of the Roman Empire. And sure, battles between the Franks and the invading Umayyads happened in the Middle Ages which determined the course of French history. And sure, France was so involved in the medieval Crusades to retake Syria-Palestine from the Arabs that to this day Islamists call any Western soldier in Muslim lands a “Frank.” And sure, a few generations ago France was the colonial power in much of the Muslim world, from Algeria to Senegal to Tunisia to Syria, and fought wars in all of those places that pit Europeans against Muslims. But that’s not why terrorism exists. It’s because Muslims hate human rights or something. There is no mission of conquest, no chauvinism towards non-believers and their sovereignty, and no dual morality. There is no identitarian component to this, no deep historical memories at play here, and no clash between ethnic peoples, since those don’t exist in France.

They just need to be integrated, even though assimilation is considered morally wrong for being eurocentric and besides there is no difference between citizens so assimilation is a meaningless term. But suppose the French did try to assimilate Afro-Islamic people on more than just their census documents. The only way to integrate another population entirely is to obliterate its in-group identity vis a vis the majority population, but that assumes that Afro-Islamic populations can be made into French atheist populations. This cannot be done, and so a parallel society now exists in their midst. Denial is strong and denial is willful.

The standard truck haji, Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, was a Tunisian who moved to France in 2005. Tunisia is a Muslim country in North Africa, and many neighborhoods in France are outposts of this civilization. French intelligence did not have him on any radicalization watchlists. But why would they? Certainly there is no pattern of North African Muslims committing terror attacks in France, because neither of those identifying categories exist. There are only French citizens. On top of being bigoted, it would be likely be an illegal violation of “human rights” to identify potential Muslim terrorists on the basis of their religious affiliation and national origin. I mean, anyone could be a jihadist right?

The simple fact of the matter is that in Françafrique it is better to die than to be a racist. It is better to remain a committed ethno-masochist and xenophile because the alternative to being shot to death, bombed to pieces, or run over by 19-ton trucks is hate speech. The alternative to the islamization and africanization of France is the decolonization of France, a mindset and process which completely rejects the third-worldist consensus of the Fifth Republic. The alternative to supporting ethno-nationalism among France’s former colonies while promoting minoritization and deracination at home is to stop hating one’s own country and to take responsibility for its defense, a truly horrendous prospect to the globalist left.

Defense does not mean flying more sorties over Syria and Iraq, which is exactly what France has vowed to do in response. The heart of darkness is not overseas, and bombarding the Levant is entirely a symbolic gesture as far as combating terrorism in metropolitan France is concerned. Such actions will not end the hostile Muslim presence in France—in fact, they will only inspire a fifth column of retaliation.

One can only wonder how many more of these incidents the French government can endure before losing all of its legitimacy. A government that prefers its native population be killed by colonists over expelling said colonists to protect its native population is nakedly a hostile occupation government. Yet, the only arguments as to why these people should be allowed to take over demographically are that they have citizenship papers and that it would racist to stop them. It is only a matter of time before a French government official literally gives this as his reason for inaction. We are talking about a country that can’t go a few months without colonists massacring its indigenes and the government cucking for Islam before the bodies are in the ground.

There is no “living with terrorism.” The Fifth Republic must be succeeded by a National Republic or it will become an Islamic Republic.